Question

Compare and contrast the distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining situation. Identify how are they similar and how are they different in terms of their strengths and weaknesses of each method, and how they affect the negotiation method and describe as a “win-lose” situation, in which resources are viewed as fixed and limited. (A minimum of 300 words is required for this essay).

Answer 1

Distributive Bargaining (DB) involves individuals who’ve never had the previous experience which has been interactive and do not intend to have one in the future either. It generally leads to a win-lose situation where all the parties concerned try to get the better share of the deal or the maximum value. On the other hand, Integrative bargaining (IB) is more of an interest-based bargaining. It provides alternatives to the traditional way of distributive bargaining focused on improving the overall quality of the negotiation.

DB as mentioned earlier results in a win-lose situation wherein a particular party ends up in a more advantageous situation leaving the rest less better off. This happens because the interests of all the concerned parties are in opposition for some reason or the other. In case of IB, the negotiation ends in a win-win situation for all the parties concerned. All objectives of respective parties are met to some extent and no one feels less better off and they leave the table with a level of satisfaction. It is not a personal war that needs to be won but a problem that needs to be resolved in a collaborative manner.

In DB, either party is bent on meeting their personal interests or objectives without paying any heed to the loss the opposing party would face. It generally is the case wherein individuals have never really cooperated in the past and do not intend to do so in the future either. However, in IB the focus is always on the mutual interests. Effective thinking and research goes into novel ideas that brings benefits to all the parties concerned. In the process, trust building takes place and the foundation of a lasting relationship is laid down.

In DB, all the other parties are competitors and parties don’t want to sacrifice the smallest of values to the opponents. When it comes to IB, collaboration holds the key and the mutual benefit of the entire group is viewed as the goal. It can be said that IB administers or tends to lower conflict whereas DB escalates the conflict.

On the whole, both IB and DB are a part of our daily day-to-day activities and we experience or make us of these negotiation techniques on a regular level. No negotiation is complete without undergoing the test of either DB or IB. Where IB often creates relationships or bonds for a longer duration and sets a tone of amicable resolution for all future conflicts, DB is not concerned about holding on to any relationship, the objective is merely win and make the other party lose.